You are currently browsing the monthly archive for January 2014.
This post from The Bewilderness explains the low prevalence of false rape accusations.
“Anon asked: Tonight I was speaking with a female coworker about rape culture and how terrifying it is to live with fear of knowing that if I was raped, it’s a high possibility that no one would believe me or take me seriously. She then said that she doesn’t have a problem with that because “most girls lie about being raped”. What would you say in response to that? I’ve heard many people say that but I have no idea how to respond.”
And the response – (TW Rape)
Your female co-worker doesn’t know anything. I hate that she said that.
There is zero benefit to “crying rape”. There was a study out last year, I believe, that cited of all rape accusations, .5% of them were false accusations.
The reason? Because once again, there is zero benefit in doing so. When you claim someone has raped you, what that means is you are about to get dragged through the mud. Every decision you’ve ever made, “relevant” or otherwise will be questioned. You will be called horrific names, so on and so forth.
And that’s why so many women and girls who are raped choose not to come forward. In doing so, they are re-traumatized, and they will likely have nothing to show for it; meaning, no one will believe them, and their loved ones will often turn on them.
Rape is a kind of horror, but the aftermath of it within a rape culture, is another beast all together. xx
That is the way the myth is created.
If you report a rape they don’t believe you because denial is the first response to bad news.
Then they bargain. Maybe it wasn’t really rape because you weren’t beaten half to death by a stranger. Maybe it was just a misunderstanding.
Misdirected anger comes next for you saying such a terrible thing about such a “nice guy” or famous guy or friendly guy. And what were you wearing, you probably were asking for it.
By now the rape victim has usually been silenced. They sure as hell won’t be talking to you about it ever again.
So it must have been a lie they told for sympathy, or meanness, or attention, or any one of the many reasons for lying that we ascribe to victims of abuse for having the unmitigated gall to speak of the abuse they suffer.
So they repeat the myth that most girls lie and that perpetuates the myth that most girls lie.
It never seems to occur to them that most boys lie, most men lie, most rapists lie.
The B♭ (B-flat) major scale consists of the pitches B♭, C, D, E♭, F, G, and A. Its key signature has two flats, B/E (see below: Scales and keys).
Its relative minor is G minor, and its parallel minor is B♭ minor.
Many transposing instruments are pitched in B-flat major, including the clarinet, trumpet, tenor saxophone, and soprano saxophone.
A few famous works in B flat major:
- Brandenburg Concerto No. 6 (Bach)
- Piano Concerto No. 15 (Mozart)
- Piano Concerto No. 27 (Mozart)
- Piano Sonata No. 11 (Beethoven)
- Piano Concerto No. 2 (Beethoven)
- Symphony No. 4 (Beethoven)
- String Quartet No. 6 (Beethoven)
- String Quartet No. 13 (Beethoven)
- Große Fuge (Beethoven)
- Piano Sonata No. 29 (Beethoven)
- Piano Sonata No. 21 (Schubert)
- Symphony No. 2 (Mendelssohn)
- Piano Concerto No. 2 (Brahms)
- Symphony No. 5 (Bruckner)
- Symphony No. 5 (Prokofiev)
- Piano Concerto No. 4 (Prokofiev)
- String Sextet No. 1 (Brahms)
- Prelude in B-flat major (Rachmaninoff)
- String Quartet No. 5 (Shostakovich)
- Mass No. 3 (Schubert)
A big thanks to the CBC and Paolo Pietropaolo for hosting the Signature Series.
Nice to have a handy reference poster to deal with our anti-choice, forced birth friends.

And here is why :
Abortion fails to meet the legal definition of murder even when abortion is illegal (Interesting huh?)
Here’s why:
Unlawful – Abortion is not unlawful in North America.
Person hood– A fetus is not legally defined as a person. Nor can it be defined scientifically as a person. Person hood is a purely philosophical position. Most philosopher’s agree that there are certain basic requirements that one must meet to be defined a person and a fetus fails to meet them all.
Malice – No one gets abortions to punish or kill fetuses specifically. Most people feel zero malice towards the fetus they are aborting. Some feel sorry for it, some feel nothing and yes, some (Maybe a few) feel angry that it exists (And I’m sure other emotions too), but malice is not one.
No one wants an abortion just to kill something.
Premeditation – Premeditation would require that abortion be the end goal before the pregnancy even begins. This means that the person would have to have sex just so they could get an abortion. No one does. Premeditation therefore does not exist.
Lawful excuse – You have a lawful excuse. The right to Bodily Autonomy. This is the right which allows us to decide who may use our bodies, what parts they may use, what they may be used for and for how long. This means if I do not consent to the use of my uterus by a fetus I have the right to remove said fetus. Bodily Autonomy is the most basic human right.
There you have it. Abortion fails to meet the requirements for murder at every stage. Yes, it’s gory and bloody when you use late term abortions (which only account for about 1.5% of abortions anyways and are dead fetuses that failed to be expelled naturally, fetuses that were actively dying and putting the pregnant person in immediate danger and fetal abnormalities.)
Yes, it’s unpleasant to look at -so is open heart surgery. Being unpleasant to look at doesn’t equal murder though, it never has.
So no. Abortion is not murder, hope you enjoyed my uneducated arguments about law, logic, philosophy and human rights.
Wow, it is nice to find this so clearly defined. The fetus-fetish signal will be turned on and set to 11 shortly, I’m sure.
Go read The Bowl, the Ram and the Folded Map:Navigating the Complicated world by Elodie Under Glass. It is fine narrative post with plenty of interesting bits and sheep! It is wool worth your while. However, these paragraphs in particular, caught my educational eye as they articulate not only what happened to me, but what I see happening to those I teach.
“Science is traditionally taught by blowing the minds of students who struggle to understand the workings of pepper grinders, and leaving them to pick up the pieces for themselves. The students then reassemble the fragments of their minds incorrectly, retaining the sexy and surprising bit, and filling in the rest of the gaps with porridge before going out into the world and smugly misunderstanding everything they see in it. Naturally, what they observe in the world does not match the porridge in their heads. Sometimes the students reassess their minds and realize that the world is infinitely more complicated than porridge and that most of their education was a series of easy lies, in which case they are usually doomed to be writers or scientists. Conversely, if they insist that the world actually matches the composition of their porridge, such that the observable world is wrong, then they will go on to be successful and influential.
This is why people still insist that evolutionary biology underlies gender theory, and why they genuinely and honestly think that seasons are caused by the Earth’s elliptical orbit moving it closer to the Sun.
(it seems that there is a certain type of historical accuracy that only makes sense if it matches a historically inaccurate picture of the world.)”
My university days were long, dark, and cold. Socially meh, but then again social has always been on the “meh” side for me. Let’s use the term “methodical” to describe my educational experience, as in, I need “x” coursed to get “x” educational degree so I can get teach students stuff they are not interested in learning. I graduated in 1999 taking the seven year approach to a 4 year program, coming out the other side with bright shiny knollege!!! coupled with important educational ideas and lofty notions of helping children reach their collective potentials.
All of which came crashing down around my head with my very first desk being tossed in my general direction by an angry student one day. Backstory first. Ever the romantic, I took the subjects that I was interested in during my University tenure: Philosophy, History and Psychology and some English because I needed a minor.
My first teaching gig? In areas where I knew stuff? Hardly. It was a week at a school/ranch in rural Alberta specializing in troubled boys who, let me assure you, are not one bit interested in learning what I had to offer. I learned very quickly that the primary attribute required for teaching was patience, coupled with a side of patience then with some patience sprinkled on top, finishing with a delightful dollop of patience for dessert. Behavioural education is a bit of a different beast than the regular educational stream. Less focus on the traditional curriculum but much more focus on character and routine building and other humanizing activities.
I’m disgusted with what people do to their children. The experiences of frustration, anger, and pain whipsaws these kids into cold reactive silence. Their emotional scar tissue protects them and, at the same time, holds them back because progress and maturation requires taking risks which doesn’t happen when you have been playing defense all of your life. Cue all the anti-social destructive habits that make the pain go away, but land you in such lovely institutions as the ranch where I began my teaching career.
I’ve made it into the urban school board now as a supply teacher once again (woo) and stare at the long slog of building relationships and contacts that might get me hired somewhere. I’ve been there and done that once before, and I’m not sure that I want to do it again. I’m not sure is up with all the anecdata, but it was needed to get to this point to answer what the quote from Elodie was getting at – education doesn’t happen unless you undertake it yourself.
The University of Alberta offers off-season courses, amenably called the Spring/Summer semesters in which you can take 12 week courses squashed into a 6 week period. The learning is intense and the requires dedication and perseverance inside and outside of the lectures. Unlike my undergraduate days, I simply loved going to these classes, engaging fully into the learning process and tackling problems that ideas that broke my brain.
Loved it! The stress, the deadlines, the editing, polishing and reediting of essays and position papers, countless hours of review etc, it was great. I excelled in almost every class I took and now look back with a some pride. I did well now, as opposed to my degree studies because of the traits and knowledge learned outside of the ‘formal’ learning. I had no idea how the world worked until I read Chomsky and Zinn. I knew little of the struggles of women until I read BrownMiller (and am currently working through important works in the feminism canon), I knew little about the middle east until I read Tariq Ali and Robert Fisk.
These authors and many more fed my curiosity and growing sense of disgust and unease with the world. None of the knowledge that broke me into the world was ever found in the dim halls of my high school or the too warm/too cold lecture theatres of the University. It was a voyage sponsored alone, until I met and began to interact with my future partner, whose knowledge and scientific prowess/rigor far surpassed my own (still does, I’ve learned not to argue with awesome), goaded me into upping my intellectual game and going further than I thought possible. I owe a great debt to her for helping me build my intellect and foster the rational-academic aspects of my personality.
So how do you square being a teacher with the fact that you are stuffing a hodge-podge of oatmeal into your students heads and then with hoping that somehow they manage to find the path *despite* what you’ve taught them. Past bandying a few phrases about winnowing out the chaff or some sort of survival of the fittest bunk, I’m not seeing much sunshine in this particular situation.
This from the article entitled How Organized Minorities Defeat Disorganized Majorities – by Seth Masket
“So how exactly does an organized minority go about defeating a disorganized majority?
1. By Learning the Lesson of the Boys Club
In 1942, political scientist E. E. Schattschneider laid out the logic behind political parties, offering lessons that still elude many political observers today. A key metaphor Schattschneider offers early in his book is that of a boys club, consisting of, say, a dozen boys who are trying to elect a leader from among their ranks. Typically, every boy will vote for himself, leaving no leader after the election. All it takes to break this stalemate is a conspiracy of two boys: one who votes for the other, and in return is promised some special favors by the future leader. Thus are two boys, properly organized, able to control the fates of the disorganized other 10. This is the essence of all political organization.
—E. E. Schattschneider, Party Government, Praeger, 1942″
I’m going to have to find and read more of what Schattschneider has to say, as he seems to be right on the money.










Your opinions…